Skip to main content

Is organic wine a healthier choice?

Many people accept as gospel that organic food (and wine is a food) is healthier. No chemicals, harmful pesticides, or hormones must mean more nutritional value, right? Maybe, but there is a surprising lack of evidence in the form of dietary intervention studies –that is, actual measures of health parameters comparing organic and regular diets. That isn’t to say that there aren’t any, and recent studies are helping to shed some light on the subject.


Beyond the questions of environmental stewardship and moral/ethical reasons to eat organic, it is important to identify what sorts of nutrients that organic foods might contain in greater abundance and how this translates into better health. Vitamins aren’t the answer; simple enough to take a multivitamin pill and get what you need. A more promising possibility is antioxidants, nutrients such as the polyphenols that make red wine red and in general seem to be more prevalent in brightly colored foods. Antioxidants come in a variety of types, but in general they act as part of self-defense systems against spoilage and a number of environmental challenges. A well-know example is resveratrol from wine; this pluripotent polyphenol is an antiviral, antifungal, all-around good guy that seems to have a wide range of anti-aging properties. And because plants make these in response to environmental stress, they should make more of them when not pampered with sprays, fertilizers, and all manner of unnatural things, they should be more nutritious when left to fend for themselves. (A related concept is “biodynamic” farming.)

So a diet higher in antioxidants is a good thing. The science, however, is a bit trickier, since there are various ways of measuring antioxidant potency, and what works in the lab may not in the diet. Among the various ways to measure antioxidant potency is the ORAC test (Oxygen Radical Absoption Capacity), and it is possible to measure a sort of whole body ORAC with what is called “human plasma total antioxidant capacity.” The aforementioned study started by determining the ORAC levels of organic vs. traditionally farmed foods, including wine, and the scores were higher for the organic foods (with a few exceptions.) In test subjects converted to an organic Mediterranean diet, an increase of 21% in total body antioxidant capacity was seen after 14 days.

Does this mean your wines (and other foods) should be organic? You could make a case for it, but there are plenty of non-organically grown wines that pack a healthy punch. Winemakers already intentionally stress the vines in specific ways because more polyphenols also means more flavorful and distinctive wines. It is just fortunate that good wines tend to be good for you too.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Which came first: Beer or wine? (or something else?)

Actually neither beer nor wine was the first fermented beverage, and wine arguably has a closer connection to health, but recent evidence indicates that humans developed the ability to metabolize alcohol long before we were even human. The uniquely human ability to handle alcohol comes from the digestive enzyme alcohol dehydrogenase, or ADH4. A new science called paleogenetics identifies the emergence of the modern version of the ADH4 gene in our ape ancestors some 10 million years ago. Interestingly, this corresponds to the time when our arboreal forebears transitioned to a nomadic lifestyle on the ground. We went from swinging from tree limbs to walking upright, and the rest is history. Understanding the circumstances that led to perpetuation of the ADH4 mutation may contain clues to what made us human in the first place. How the ability to metabolize alcohol made us human Paleogenetecist Matthew Carrigan has an idea about how this happened . Arboreal species rely on fruit tha

Why I am not surprised that the NIH cancelled the alcohol-health study

Not long after enrolling the first patients in the much hyped prospective study on alcohol and health, the National Institutes of Health recently announced that they were pulling the plug. I am actually more surprised that they ever got it off the ground in the first place. As I wrote a year ago when the study was still in its planning stages, there were too many competing interests, criticisms of the study design, and concerns about funding to expect that whatever results came out would be universally accepted. Nevertheless, I am disappointed. The study, called Moderate Alcohol and Cardiovascular Health Trial (MACH) was intended to provide hard evidence about the health effects of moderate alcohol consumption by prospectively assigning subjects with heart disease to one drink per day or not drinking, which they were to follow for up to 10 years. Most existing data on the question is retrospective, or simply tracks a subject population according to their drinking preferences, w